Fighting the Right

As everyone knows, Glenn Beck is a reasonable and rational man who is not at all prone to hyperbole or wholesale emotional breakdowns, which is why it was so surprising to learn that he did not very much like President Obama's State of the Union Address last night, calling it "horrific from start to finish" and declaring that it is the speech that future historians will look back upon as the moment Obama seized control and declared himself to be a dictator.

"Over and over again," Beck said, "looking us in the eye, he said he would use his executive power to get his way. He bragged about it!" As such, Beck urged his audience to note this day in their diaries so that future generations will know the true history, which is that "this was the State of the Union where our president declared he would become America's first dictator":

When Allen West lost his seat in Congress in 2012, his supporters immediately cried voter fraud based on a claim that one county in his Florida district had reported 141 percent of its registered voters turning out to the polls. The claim was bogus, because the 141 percent figure was misleading.

The actual turnout in the county was 69.56 percent, while the 141 percent figure represented the number of “cards cast.”

Since the ballot was two pages long, every voter cast two cards, hence the initial report that the number of “cards cast” amounted to 141 percent of registered voters.

Even the voter-fraud obsessed group True the Vote notes that in “St. Lucie County, ballots were at least two pages or ‘cards.’ Policy dictates that each card be counted separately, leading to a total of 247,383 ‘votes’, aka cards, cast. Divide the number by half, then exhale.”

So even though this claim of voter fraud has been debunked, a right-wing group is still citing the bogus charge in its opposition to restoring the Voting Rights Act. Speaking with the American Family Association’s OneNewsNow today, Bob Parks of Project 21 used the imaginary 141 percent figure to allege that massive voter fraud is undeniable:

An organization of black conservatives says a new bill provides election fraudsters with opportunity to potentially steal elections by nullifying the votes of law-abiding citizens.

…

Now the Voting Rights Amendment Act of 2014 – sponsored by both Republican and Democratic lawmakers – would create a new formula; and with it new criteria that could force even more jurisdictions to have to report to federal overseers on all matters related to the electoral process.

Bob Parks, who operates the website Black & Right, is a member of the national advisory council for Project 21.

"Having [a] federal government – especially [one] like this one that has an attorney general who picks and chooses which crimes and which offenses that he wishes to investigate, [and] which laws that they will simply ignore – it's ripe for corruption," he argues.

According to Parks, upwards of 19 states have counties with more than 100-percent voter registration. "You have situations ... I believe it was in the Allen West race in Florida where the voting was 141-percent," he recalls. "You can't tell me there's not a voter fraud problem."

Rep. Louie Gohmert, who recently unveiled his bold plan to tax the poorest Americans by taxing some of their government benefits, criticized President Obama yesterday for acting like “Santa Claus.”

Chatting with Fox News pundit Sean Hannity, whom Gohmert had invited as his guest to the State of the Union address, the Texas Republican said he wore a Santa Claus tie to the speech because “we’re going to be listening to Santa Claus tonight promising whatever anybody wants they can have.”

On today's "Faith and Freedom" radio broadcast, Matt Barber and Mat Staver discussed a recent report from Open Doors USA that found that most anti-Christian persecution happening around the world is occurring in Muslim nations.

Barber, of course, used this as an excuse to trot out the standard Religious Right claim that liberals and Muslims are both persecuting Christians at home and abroad because both groups hate God's truth. But the point of the broadcast today was to discuss why American Christians have remained silent while their Christian brothers and sisters around the world have suffered brutal persecution and Barber didn't really know ... but he did know why President Obama hasn't spoken out: because he hates Christians:

Staver: it's one thing to criticize the administration but it's another thing about the church itself. Where are the voices of Christians here in the United States rising to the level of saying that this Christian persecution needs to be addressed?

Barber: Let's parse this out because I think that there are different motives here. When it comes to President Obama, as we discussed in a recent recording of Faith and Freedom, it's pretty clear; for him to criticize these Muslim nations for killing, for murdering and torturing Christians, it doesn't fit the narrative. We know that his sympathies lie with these Muslim nations and against Christianity and against Christians and so it's not surprising that he would choose to be silent. I'm disgusted by it but I'm not surprised by it.

I'm baffled by the silence of the church, as you mentioned, here in the United States and I don't know what the motive of that silence is other than perhaps fear or apathy and it's time for the church to get behind and support these Christians who are being martyred across the world.

So President Obama hasn't spoken out about this persecution because he hates Christians, but Christians haven't spoken out about it either ... for who knows what reason?

We also like to simply note that neither Barber nor Staver have said much, if anything, about this issue in all the years we have been listening to their programs. If Barber is "baffled" by the silence of the church in talking about this issue, he just so happens have a daily radio broadcast and a weekly column that he could be using to combat that, but over the last few years, he apparently hasn't felt that it was much of a priority.

Jim Garrow reacted to President Obama’s State of the Union by once again callingforthepresident’s death, this time comparing him to a rabid dog who should be “put down.”

In a Facebook post today, Garrow suggested that Satan was behind Obama’s rise to power and called the president a “quisling agent” who should face a revolution.

The Speech:

"The Boy Who Cried Wolf" is at it again. Perhaps a real wolf will eat him so we don't have to listen to the lies. Rabid dogs are put down for the protection of the innocent and to prevent the spread of disease.

Our "loyal opposition" can't even yell "You lie" without offering an apology later and backing down from speaking the truth. Ted Cruz and Rand Paul made their usual attempt at truth telling but like the Scripture tells us "A prophet is without honor in his own land", and they will be ignored unless it is to hold them up to ridicule on the morning talk shows.

In the meantime the meteor of doom continues on its course with the mad man Obama laughing derisively at the "colonialist empire" he is wreaking havoc on and bringing down. The great Satan allowed its guard to slip and a quisling agent to penetrate. His work of devastation is not done and he has spread his manure of deceit across the land again.

The lonely voices of those not addled into submission to the lies find themselves Alinskied at every turn, browbeaten into conformity, or forced to disappear into obscurity for their audacity in declaring the Emperor to be unclothed, and bare faced in his lies.

Obama is revolting in his prevarication, and our response should be to revolt - period.

Surprising no one, the Family Research Council is attempting to spin a new Harvard study which found that “children raised in communities with high percentages of single mothers are significantly less likely to experience absolute and relative mobility” as a reason to oppose marriage equality. FRC president Tony Perkins and senior fellow Peter Sprigg addressed the Harvard findings on Monday’s edition of Washington Watchduring a discussion of a proposed anti-gay amendment in Indiana.

After Sprigg noted that “if a child grows up in a community with married households, that child will do better than a child raised in a community where there are many single parent households,” he said that the study affirmed his opposition to marriage equality: “This is exactly what I’ve been saying about the marriage issue, if you redefine marriage it’s not going to affect just those couples, it’s going to affect the whole community by setting an example.”

“That study then answers that question: how does my same-sex marriage affect yours?” Perkins added. “Well, it may not affect my marriage but it affects my children because it has an impact upon marriage across the board.”

Essentially, Perkins and Sprigg are arguing that by banning gay couples from getting married, they will somehow reduce the number of single parent households.

Don’t worry if that argument makes no sense to you, because it shouldn’t: it relies on an oft-repeated but discredited claim that the legalization of same-sex marriage makes it less likely for opposite-sex couples to get married.

U.S. District Court Judge Robert J. Shelby found [PDF] that Utah couldn’t provide any evidence to support its claim that banning same-sex marriage was necessary to curb a negative impact on opposite-sex marriage:

The State has presented no evidence that the number of opposite-sex couples choosing to marry each other is likely to be affected in any way by the ability of same-sex couples to marry. Indeed, it defies reason to conclude that allowing same-sex couples to marry will diminish the example that married opposite-sex couples set for their unmarried counterparts. Both opposite-sex and same-sex couples model the formation of committed, exclusive relationships, and both establish families based on mutual love and support. If there is any connection between same-sex marriage and responsible procreation, the relationship is likely to be the opposite of what the State suggests. Because Amendment 3 does not currently permit same-sex couples to engage in sexual activity within a marriage, the State reinforces a norm that sexual activity may take place outside the marriage relationship.

In defending Russia's law, Klingenschmitt explained that recruiting children into homosexuality is "totally illegal in the economy and law of God" and, citing Luke 17, declared that "if you're recruiting children into sin, Jesus says you should have the death penalty."

"It's always going to be against God's law," he said, "not only to be gay but especially to recruit children and cause them to stumble":

Is it possible to talk about human rights abuses in Russia in the context of the Olympics and not once mention Russia’s anti-gay laws, the rising tide of anti-gay violence, or the controversy over the impact that Russia’s anti-gay “propaganda” law might have on athletes and visitors? Sure, if you’re Sen. Ted Cruz speaking at an event hosted by the Heritage Foundation.

Cruz, darling of the Religious Right and Tea Party, slammed Russia’s “increasingly autocratic” president at the January 28 Heritage event. He portrayed Vladimir Putin as a tyrant systematically working to crush Ukrainian independence and reassemble the old Soviet Union. And of course he took the opportunity to slam the Obama administration, which he said was not standing up forcefully for human rights.

Following Cruz to the microphone was Katrina Lantos Swett, Vice Chair of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom. Swett, a “proud Democrat,” detailed a litany of anti-democratic laws adopted in Putin’s Russia, including “religious freedom” and “extremism” laws that give the government wide latitude to discriminate against minority religions, including Muslims, Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and Pentecostal Christians. She said the Russian government is undermining civil society with severe restrictions on protests and the return of Soviet-era tactics like sentencing dissidents to psychiatric treatment. Swett did mention the anti-gay “propaganda” law in her list of Putin’s anti-democratic actions.

There are a couple remarkable things about this panel, other than finding myself in agreement with Cruz about something (Putin is an anti-democratic strongman).

First, in his 26-minute speech and during the Q&A, at an event about human rights and the Olympics, Cruz did not breathe a word about the raging controversy over Russia’s attacks on the rights and lives of LGBT people. The closest Cruz came was mentioning, as an example of Putin’s efforts to crush dissent, his moves against “a punk rock band.” Cruz joked about his unwillingness to say the band’s name (Pussy Riot).

Second, Cruz is clearly at odds with anti-gay and anti-abortion leaders in the U.S. who have been busily praising Putin as the defender of traditional values and savior of Christianity. Liberty Counsel’s Matt Barber, for example, has said Putin is being allowed to “out-Christian our once-Christian nation.” The American Family Association’s Bryan Fischer has called Putin “the lion of Christianity, the defender of Christian values, the president that’s calling his nation back to embracing its identity as a nation founded on Christian values.”

In fact there is a whole gaggle of Religious Right leaders who have, as Miranda has reported, fallen all over themselves to praise Putin and his anti-free-speech, anti-gay crackdown. And some of them have done more than just praise Putin. Brian Brown of the National Organization for Marriage traveled to Russia to build support for anti-gay legislation. The Illinois-based Howard Center for Family, Religion, and Society is excited about heading to Moscow for its 2014 “World Congress of Families” summit.

Cruz was eager to criticize the Obama administration for not advocating more strongly for human rights in Russia, but what does he have to say about his Religious Right pals who are actively praising and enabling Putin’s anti-democratic moves? And who have attacked the Obama administration’s efforts to promote the human rights of LGBT people abroad? We’re listening.

She calls the awards show “a forthright assault on conservatives” that aided the “homosexual advancement” in American culture.

Owens claims that conservatives shouldn’t “be so defensive” about their anti-gay views or “surrender” to gay rights advocates. Instead, she advises conservatives to just show how totally-not-homophobic they are: “Sometimes I deliberately go through the checkout line of the lesbian clerk to drop a few words of Jesus’ love in her ear and then compliment her haircut.”

The Grammy Awards is proof positive that the culture war has unabashedly come front and center against conservatives – let alone Christians.

I don’t watch the Grammys, but in light of all the frenzy via social media over the gay-marriage ceremony that aired live during the show, I decided to watch this segment on YouTube to understand exactly what went down.

What I witnessed was a forthright assault on conservatives.

…

Are we shocked or appalled that straight couples happily exchanged marriage vows alongside homosexuals and lesbians on national television? Haven’t we seen the signs all along? For decades, homosexual advancement has encroached upon Christians and conservatives. Everything from rainbows to school curriculum to parades have been hijacked by progressives, tossed to politicians and handed down to liberal activists working alongside comrades in the entertainment industry. Macklemore was not ONE voice with a few stage props who sang for ONE night. He adequately represents a culmination of years of erosion of Christian and conservative values through liberal ideology and implementation.

So what should Christians and conservatives do? Complain to CBS? Sign petitions? Blog about how awful this behavior is for society? Those are sound starting places.

I propose this: Be yourself and don’t be so defensive. I’m myself no matter the situation or people. Sometimes I deliberately go through the checkout line of the lesbian clerk to drop a few words of Jesus’ love in her ear and then compliment her haircut. Or I encourage the star-struck 17-year-old to become informed on political issues that will affect her life, then discuss those big hoop earrings she’s sporting. No defense, no arguments, no worries. I remain offensive. I’m me.

Remind yourself that conservative values are still a major element in society, and Christianity is the only answer for cultural depravity. The Grammy folks want us to believe otherwise. They took a blatant shot at us through deplorable lyrics and godless imagery and tried to frame the narrative to say that homosexuality is widely accepted as the norm. They’re wrong. Society at large does not accept that narrative. They hope we’ll throw our hands up and surrender. Don’t do it. Order my book for a “how to” approach to dealing with godless liberalism within society.

WorldNetDaily columnist Christopher Monckton thinks that democracy is in danger, and the only way to save it is by banning anyone who receives any government benefits — “everything from food stamps to Medicaid and Medicare” — from voting.

This proposal would strip voting rights from most elderly and low-income Americans; in fact, nearly half of Americans live in a household where someone receives some form of government benefit. But Monckton says that this massive voting prohibition would prevent the “death of democracy.”

The Union is now in a state of disunion. On one side of the Great Divide, those who work for a living and pay their taxes. Most taxpayers vote Republican. On the other side, those who do not work for a living and pay little or no tax. Nearly all non-contributors vote “Democrat.”

…

Nearly everyone who is unemployed votes “Democrat.” Nearly every immigrant, at least in the first generation, votes “Democrat.” Nearly every non-white American votes “Democrat.” The GOP know that so intellectually and financially bankrupt an administration should never have been re-elected – indeed, given the scale of electoral fraud practiced by the “Democrats,” he may not actually have been re-elected (always supposing that he had the constitutional right to hold the office of president in the first place).

Houston, we have a problem. America as we knew her and admired her is going down, sinking financially and politically under the tide of takers. For takers are also voters, and that is the problem. The taxpayees can vote themselves more and more and more of the taxpayers’ money.

Yet so little attention has been given to the death of democracy via the growing cost and reach of federal welfare programs that the word “taxpayees” has not existed until this moment. Google it and the search engine will assume you have made a spelling mistake. It will give you thousands of references to “taxpayers.”

…

First, the federal authorities need to know who is getting welfare benefits – everything from food stamps to Medicaid and Medicare. In the future, if you want a handout from Uncle Sam, you will need to prove to him who you are. If you are an illegal immigrant, sorry, but no more handouts. If you are a lawful immigrant, sorry, but no handouts in your first five years in the United States. Period. If you don’t like that, don’t come.

Very important: If you are claiming any handout, you are not entitled to vote. Taxpayers will have the right to vote, but taxpayees will not. That way, no one can vote himself a handout.

We haveseenit happentime andagain: some right-wing group issues a one-sided press release about a student supposedly being unfairly discriminated against in school simply for exercising their Christian faith and the entire Religious Right movement immediately flies into an outrage, spreading the story far and wide as undisputed truth. Then days or weeks later, the real story emerges once school officials are given an opportunity to investigate and explain what really happened and it inevitably reveals that the Religious Right version was completely false, by which point it is already too late because the fake version has already been accepted as gospel and just continues to spread forever.

The most recent example is the story of six-year old Brynn Williams, who was supposedly told that she was not allowed to deliver a presentation on her family's Christmas tradition because she brought the star that her family places atop its Christmas tree, which represents the Star of Bethlehem.

Brynn Williams decided to bring the Star of Bethlehem that adorned the top of her family’s Christmas tree. She also worked on a one minute presentation to explain that her family’s tradition is to remember the birth of Jesus at Christmas time.

“Our Christmas tradition is to put a star on top of our tree,” the little girl said. “The star is named the Star of Bethlehem. The three kings followed the star to find baby Jesus, the Savior of the world.”

Before the child could utter another word, the teacher intervened, according to Robert Tyler, the general counsel for Advocates for Faith & Freedom – the law firm representing the Williams family.

“Brynn’s teacher said, ‘Stop right there! Go take your seat,’” Tyler said. “Bryn was not allowed to finish her presentation by reciting the Bible verse, John 3:16.”

Tyler said the little girl was the only student in the class not allowed to finish her presentation.

“After Brynn took her seat, the teacher explained to Brynn in front of all the other students that she was not allowed to talk about the Bible or share its verses,” Tyler said.

The story was quickly picked up by justabouteveryReligious Rightnews outlet and reported as truth, but now the school involved, which "withheld comment until district officials could finish an investigation into the matter," has released a statement from the teacher and school officials which completely debunks the Religious Right's version of the story.

The teacher, Tammy Williams, explained what really happened:

On Thursday, December 19th my class was getting our classroom ready for our holiday party that was to occur the next morning. We took longer than normal putting things away to ensure that the desks were clean and book boxes were put away so that tables could be used for our centers. This was normally something we did on Fridays. Because of this, we were running behind and I still had six students who needed to do their sharing. I had a very limited amount of time and needed to make sure all students had time to share. Now remember, this is sharing. They were not oral reports. Students were asked to share a family tradition. It could be anything, not just a Christmas tradition. During sharing, I work with students on looking at the audience and using clear voices. We also work on listening skills and asking questions.

This student was not the last student to present as had been reported. I still had a couple of students after her (which was the Student of the Day and the Student of the Week). When she started her share, she pulled out her golden star that I held for her as she pulled out her prepared speech
written by one of her parents. This was unusual because rarely does a student have a prepared statement to read. As I held the star, the student began to read her statement. I helped her with a few words that she was having trouble with. I decided that I would have the student stop after sharing about Mary and Joseph. I felt that it would take too long and I still needed her to take her question and I had a few clarifying questions for her as well. At this point, I simply said the following, “Ok, stop here and you get one question.” She simply put her paper down and picked a student who asked her a question. I also asked her, “Who puts the star on the tree? Do you take turns?” I even suggested that her dad could lift her up to let her put it on the tree. After that, she put her star away and sat with the class while we finished with the other students. I monitor all students this way. She at no time complained or acted sad. She was as happy as always.

I want to be very clear about the following.

At no time did I ever tell the student that she could not read the bottom section because it was a Bible verse nor did she ask if she could finish. I never told her to “Stop right there!” or “Go take your seat!” or reprimand her in front of the class for sharing from the Bible. It just did not happen. This subject matter was never discussed. I decided to stop her at that point so the other students would get their share in before the bell rang. My students have always been free to share their ideas.

What saddens me is that this story was twisted into lies and brought to the media. I have never sat down and discussed this directly with the family or the student. I am instead being used to push an agenda for the Advocates for Faith and Freedom.

The school's principal, Ami Paradise, likewise released a statement declaring that the claims of anti-Christian bigotry made by Advocates of Faith and Freedom were entirely bogus:

Over the past week, I have received countless phone calls and 126 mean-spirited emails from across the country as a result of the claims that the Advocates of Faith and Freedom have made against one of my teachers, the school district, and myself. These claims are simply not true.

When I met with the parent on December 20, 2013, she shared that she and her husband were upset that their child was unable to finish her presentation and that they thought it was because it contained a Bible verse. There were absolutely no claims of humiliation or bullying by the classroom teacher. No claims that their child was told to take her seat or that she could not talk about the Bible. These claims have been made in the midst of a media spotlight in order to sensationalize a story. The truth is, there were other students left to present before the end of the day, and there was just not enough time.

Furthermore, when I met with this parent I never told her that her child may not share her beliefs aloud to other students nor did I try to stifle her freedom of speech in any way. I told the parent that I would follow up with the classroom teacher, and I sent her the results of my findings along with the copy of the board policy regarding religion on December 24th, 2013. I have not heard from her since. Not once to tell me that she did not agree with my findings, not once to ask for a classroom change for her child. In fact, with the exception of today, this student has attended school every day since this incident, in the same exact classroom where this alleged incident occurred.

Lastly, I would be remiss if I did not address the classroom teacher in the center of this controversy-- Mrs. Tammy Williams. Mrs. Tammy Williams is one of the finest educators I have ever worked with. She is an AMAZING first grade teacher, taught my own son last year, and I would not hesitate to put my younger son in her class. She does not deserve the harassment or bullying that she has received, the questioning of her professional skills or judgment, or the claims that she harmed this child in any way.

I stand behind Mrs. Tammy Williams 110% and find it extremely unfortunate that the Advocates for Faith and Freedom have irrevocably caused damage to her good name. The days will pass and this story will not be at the top of the news for long, but the damage that it has done to the good names of Helen Hunt Jackson Elementary School, Mrs. Tammy Williams, and myself will be difficult to repair.

We literally cannot even count the number of times we have seen this exact scenario play out over the years as Religious Right groups gin up an entirely fake controversy in order to play the victim, which then spreads far and wide before officials have even had an opportunity to comment. And we will undoubtedly continue to see it happen again and again so long as people like Starnes and others in the Religious Right grievance machine feel justified in pushing blatantly false stories because doing so helps them advance their agenda.

Like Glenn Beck, Bryan Fischer was disturbed by Katy Perry's Grammy performance and wondered on his radio program today if she and Beyoncé had sold their souls to the Devil.

Fischer was particularly alarmed by Beyoncé's performance at last year's Super Bowl because it was so Satanic that Beyoncé herself was physically transformed right in the middle of the show, becoming indwelt by the demonic spirit that Beyoncé had named "Sasha Fierce":

The good news for Fischer is that Beyoncé "killed off" the Sasha Fierce persona back in 2010, so he has no more need to worry.

Calling the performance "full-fledged witchcraft and demonic glorification," Beck said Perry's performance is further proof that American society is worshiping a false, demonic god ... "and it's not going to end well":

Former congressman and Clinton/Obama impeachment crusader Bob Barr is mounting a comeback campaign to win the Georgia congressional seat currently held by Rep. Phil Gingrey. And lucky for Barr, he has won the support of Alex Jones.

On his show last week, the InfoWars host saluted the Republican candidate’s supposed bravery in leading the fight to impeach President Clinton, telling him that “a lot of people died that went against Clinton, a lot of airplanes blew up, a lot of people got shot in the head five times and it does take backbone to try to impeach somebody when you’re going against gangsters like this.”

“We’ve got to get rid of the Clinton mafia and I think what you’re hinting at is that if we put you back into Congress, you are going to start investigating, bringing charges of impeachment up in the House,” Jones said.

Barr, who discussed his plans to impeach President Obama at November’s “Second American Revolution” rally, told Jones that he intends to recycle the articles of impeachment he brought against Clinton to use against Obama: “I took that documented, figuratively dusted it off, added a little language to it, and darned if it doesn’t sound pretty good with Barack Obama’s name in there.”

Later, Jones praised Barr’s congressional campaign. “We need to get him in there,” he said. “We’re going to pray and hope you get in there.”

Shortly after declaring on his radio show yesterday that seeing same-sex couples get married during the Grammy Awards on Sunday is the sort of that "makes you want to vomit," Erik Rush turned his attention to a tweet sent out by Sally Kohn a few days ago saying that she wants to see a Disney movie in which a princess marries another princess. Rush warned that this sort of deviance is pushing society into civil unrest that will result in people going "homo-hunting" and violently attacking their gay neighbors.

Calling Kohn an "obnoxious, maladjusted lesbian," Rush said that she was exactly the sort of person who is pushing society toward a violent breakdown when lunatics and "people who have just been pushed to the limit" finally snap and start attacking people like Sally Kohn ... which won't really bother Rush "because she sort of served to bring it about."

These people will be pushed over the edge, Rush said, because gay activists advocated for films where two princesses get married or "want to have anal fisting labs in grade school" and are generally working to "oversexualize children." As a result, "you could see a lot of people who don't deserve to get hurt, get hurt because of people like Sally Kohn":

After calling for a flat tax in order to provide “fairness” the Texas Republican said that the poorest Americans who rely on public programs should pay federal income taxes, even if they are simply returning government transfers.

“What if you’re so poor that the only money you have is what the government gives you? I wondered, isn’t that wasting money, you give it and you take it back?” Gohmert pondered. “No that gives you an investment in the country and we need that.”

American Family Association president Tim Wildmon yesterday joined other anti-gaypundits in criticizing the Grammy Awards for a performance that included a wedding service for both same-sex and opposite-sex couples, which Wildmon said shows that liberals are “force feeding the American public” with homosexuality.

“Hollywood, the entertainment industry and the political left just can’t get enough ‘gay,’” Wildmon said.

He also attacked President Obama for inviting openly gay NBA player Jason Collins to the State of the Union address: “President Obama now has invited an NBA player to sit in the gallery for the State of the Union speech precisely because he has sex with other men and is proud of it. These people don’t just want acceptance, they want middle America’s approval.”

Tim Graham of the Media Research Center accused the Grammys of trying to “flush the Bible on national TV,” while Family Research Council senior fellow Peter Sprigg said the award show has been “shamelessly exploited in support of a radical social and political agenda.”

“Hollywood, the entertainment industry and the political left just can’t get enough ‘gay,’” American Family Association president Tim Wildmon told LifeSiteNews. “They are force feeding the American public. We have ‘Kinky Boots’ which are cross-dressers in the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day parade, we got a homosexual wedding float in the Rose Bowl Parade and now we are pushing ‘gay marriage’ during the Grammy Awards. President Obama now has invited an NBA player to sit in the gallery for the State of the Union speech precisely because he has sex with other men and is proud of it. These people don’t just want acceptance, they want middle America’s approval.”

“It is unfortunate that CBS and the Grammys would allow an entertainment awards show to be so shamelessly exploited in support of a radical social and political agenda,” Peter Sprigg, Senior Fellow for Policy Studies at the Family Research Council, told LifeSiteNews. “It’s ironic that these ceremonies accompanied a song, ‘Same Love.’ The government has no legitimate interest in ‘love’ alone, but it does have an interest in encouraging procreation and mother-father households.”

The on-air same-sex “weddings” were the brainchild of Grammy producer Ken Ehrlich, who told theNew York Times he got the idea from his lesbian daughter, who told him that Macklemore and Lewis sometimes allow couples to propose marriage onstage during concert performances of “Same Love.” Ehrlich said he suggested the duo “[take] it a step further with a full wedding.”

But Ehrlich denied that it was just a stunt. “We’re serious about this,” he told the Times. He added that while he personally believes marriage should be redefined to include same-sex couples, “I would not want to make a broad statement that it represents the views of the [National] Academy [of Recording Arts and Sciences] or the CBS television network.”

But Tim Graham, director of media analysis for the conservative Media Research Center, strongly disagreed.

“They can say this is not a stunt, but that's exactly what it is, a piece of musical agitprop to mock the traditional values of conservative American Christians, Jews, Muslims, and others,” Graham wrote on the NewsBusters blog. “Entertainers never want to have a debate, just a series of arrogant ‘statements’ with no opportunity for a conversation as they flush the Bible on national TV.”

It has been a while since Glenn Beck dedicated his opening monologue to misrepresenting disparate global events in order to weave together an incoherent explanation of just how America has turned into a tyrannical communist/fascist/Nazi dictatorship.

But that was his message again last night, spurred on by his outrage over the fact that people were offended by a letter to the editor published in the Wall Street Journal in which billionaire venture capitalist Tom Perkins compared the "progressive war on the American one percent" to the demonization of the Jews during the Holocaust.

Perkins has since apologized and Beck is outraged over the fact that Perkins has been "savagely beaten in public" for simply telling the truth.

"We are Germany 1930," Beck said. "You can deny it all you want, but the socialist revolution is here," As proof, Beck pointed to the fact that Perkins' company, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, sent out a tweet distancing itself from his comments:

Tom Perkins has not been involved in KPCB in years. We were shocked by his views expressed today in the WSJ and do not agree.

That tweet is, for Beck, proof that Perkins is being ostracized just as the Jews were under the Nazi regime.

"Is this a healthy society that says this?" Beck asked, before reading the tweet. "Welcome to the brave new world, gang":